Review economics
BishopFox/sliver
Read from the 100 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
≥0%
Attributed
a floor
0
Attributed PRs
100
Other PRs
100
Read
The rest — the latest 5
#2305 fix(implant): bound mTLS and WireGuard envelope allocation from length prefix
0 reviews · 5.4d to merge
#2312 Bump golang.org/x/text from 0.37.0 to 0.40.0
0 reviews · 2.6d to merge
#2306 fix(server): guard Session.ToProtobuf against nil Connection
0 reviews · 13h to merge
#2292 fix(implant): bound pivot frame allocation from length prefix
0 reviews · 12.2d to merge
#2291 fix(server): rotate server logs to bound disk usage
0 reviews · 12.2d to merge
How this was measured
0% of merged commits carry agent attribution — a floor, not the share; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work; 1 PR came off an agent branch with no commit attribution, so the real share runs higher; reads 100 of 1015 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
Detected: OpenAI Codex.
“Attributed” means a commit carried an agent’s signature — a co-author trailer, an agent commit identity, or an agent bot account. Tools that only complete code inline leave no such mark, so the other column is “rest”, not “human-written”. Full method and its limits
The badge reads this repo’s current report, so it follows the number.
Tell me when this moves
We re-read BishopFox/sliver weekly and email only when the number changes materially.
Read your own repos
This one is public. For a private repo, run the same read locally through your own GitHub credentials — nothing is installed and nothing is sent to us.
npx @ambera/review-taxWant this continuously on BishopFox/sliver — each pull request paired to the task it came from, and the work graded from its review loop rather than its diff size? Claim this repo in Forge
Browse every repo people have read · Read a different repository